I am making an experience based report with a sample size of 1 - something that may work at least for people who have some atypical feature similar to some of my atypical features. The theory is bolted on - I mostly stumbled upon these or let's say it was subconscious theory-forming.
No, I don't understand the reasons why the common wisdom recommends goal-consciousness. Do you?
I don't really have many more details. With goal-consciousness I experienced internal haggling. "Just this once." This is actually very similar to haggling with parents when I was a child. "Just this once let me stay up until the end of the film." This may be a clue. Simply turning the rule into a goal-less taboo and identity-element turned that haggling voice off.
As a tentative theory, this may have something to do with upbringing, routines installed via parenting. Whether it works may depend on your upbringing. The Boss (higher self) is clearly a parental voice in my head. Also, lost my dad a year ago, and I made The Boss sub-agent only a month ago, it is quite possible that a parent needs to go from real living person to an idealized memory, and the way grieving works is that we simulate chunks of the deceased person in our mind, sometimes even converse with it (what would dad do etc.) and perhaps this all is a prerequisite for this. I.e. parent dies, you simulate him/her, after a year or so as some memories fade the simulation becomes less detailed and more idealized, and then the simulation can act as The Boss? Provided the parent was bossy enough. I would say, a respected school teacher, a mentor, sensei, basically an Obi-one Kenobi can work too. Minus the supernatural element, it is akin to what Luke was doing, simulating Kenobi's ghost in his mind as a mentor.
But you were asking about the other aspect. I am not sure if that is related. Perhaps the loss of a parent can lead to a weakend identity, making it easier to construct a more useful one. As you certainly feel more "free", way less judgement, but this does not feel like the good kind of freedom (for me).
No, I don't understand the reasons why the common wisdom recommends goal-consciousness. Do you?
There are still things I'm not clear about, but I have around to understand a bit. I'm having forum discussion about personal development issues for around a decade. After years of arguing that SMART goals are bullshit I'm finally having them and using them on a daily basis.
If you want to have a room at a comfortable temperature you have to give the thermostat a target temperature. A thermostat is a quite basic cybernetic system and most cybernetic systems sim...
1. Ignoring goals, tabooing / identifying with methods - the opposite of Beeminder, even the opposite of SMART
Suppose I want to lose weight. Have a general idea of how much and how fast, and decide on the method. Then I ignore the goal and focus on the method. I ignore both the long-term and short-term goal (no Beeminder), ignore the measurement (SMART), ignore all the common wisdom here. The reason I ignore them that I want to avoid constantly haggling with myself, using the soda example, "Surely this one glass will not set me back much?" and instead I identify with the method, such as, simply shaping my identity as a person who does not drink soda, period. Instead of being conscious of the goal, just focus on this new identity. Without a goal in mind, there is nothing to haggle about and that makes it work. So there is not that kind of "Perhaps, this is a special case because X so half a glass should be allowed..." instead, it is just taboo, because it violates my new sense of self of a person who just does not do that. The beauty of this solution that there is nothing to haggle about. It is a harnessing of the cognitive dissonance and protect-your-identity mechanisms, if the new self is the sort of person who just does not drink soda then the only way to not get dissonant and to preserve the identity is to not do so. This, so far, seems to be surprisingly easy for me. It is similar to religious taboos, like people who don't eat X because then they could no longer consider themselves a pious follower of religion Y and it would shake their identity. You could say it is a custom-made nanoreligion each time. Being pious by not violating self-made taboos, preserving the identity of the pious person, without having keep the goal in consciousness.
2. Don't fight The Boss
Someone casually dropped on stopdrinking.reddit.com "It is not about fighting your urges, it is about stopping to fight your better judgement." Precisely. There is a Higher Self (say, Superego) telling me to live healthy and a Lower Self (Ego, Id) telling me to indulge in urges and cravings. Identify with Higher Self, and it is a constant fight with the Lower Self. Identify with the Lower Self and all I need to do is to surrender to the commands of the Higher Self. It does not feel good, but in this case it is okay to not feel good. I call the Higher Self The Bos. It is like "I really want to do X but The Boss does not let me do so. It makes me feel depressed. It is okay. Just accept the feeling and don't fight The Boss. You can never beat The Boss. Just surrender and accept your fate." It is also a nano, well, in this case a microreligion because it is more consistent than the one-off taboos of nanoreligions. Identifying with Lower Self is a bit of an "I am a sinner" thing, and this surrender to The Boss feels a bit religious, a bit close to the AA and 12-step methods.